According to C&D, a stock Evo IX takes 6.7 secs from 5-60mph (street start) although I saw another source at 6.4 seconds. Wow that 6.7 is slow. An RSX hits that in 6.9 and a mustang hits 5-60 mph in 5.9 seconds for comparsions sake (also from C&D). I still love my Evo's acceleration though!

http://www.caranddriver.com/features...lution-rs.html

 

I dont meant to be rude but... It really doesnt matter!?

 

Well it does to some people who don't launch their cars on the street

 

My problem is what would anyone do a rolling start for? 0-60 is what is important and is the basic standard most people look at. I bet against those cars mentioned, the Evo would've been on the top on the 0-60. Then compare them in road course or slalom....no contest there. It's a 4 cyl that depends heavily on the turbo. I bet if they did a 20 or 30 - 80 test it might have been different.

 

Taken with a LARGE grain of salt. One, they dont daily drive Evos - so I wouldnt expect stellar times from them. Two, they dont try over and over for better times. They run once or twice then write. Three, who cares.

 

we do have turbo lag

 

who races their evo in a straight line anyways

 

That is due to the fcat that the turbo must spool up from a low rpm regime while in comparisson if you launch the car from a dead stop you can launch the car from its optimum engine rpm range taking adavantge of half way spool buil up,torque and hp.

Carlos

 

5-60 runs on an AWD turbo 4-banger are about as worthless as top gear acceleration runs in, well, anything (as a performance benchmark, that is). Hell, 0-60 isn't worth much either, unless you're a traffic light to traffic light sort of bloke. 1/4-mile is far more useful.

Who the bugger is going to race from a 5 roll?

 

This is the same as when they compare the automatic cars vs the manual on top gear acceleration, always automatics are faster. A turbo car will have lag, of course.
I would not worry about it.

 

The 5-60 test is a great measure of low end torque and also gives you an idea of how hard you have to push it to get the best 0-60 times. If the 5-60 and 0-60 are close, then the launch isn't that important but if there's a large gap, like the EVO, you've really got to kill it to get the best 0-60 time.

 

Who here - or anyone interested in the Evo, for that matter - doesn't know the car lacks low-end torque in comparison to, say, an LS1?

With any car that makes even half-decent power, the launch is critical, no matter the drive type.

 

+1, its all in the launch...be it fwd, rwd, or awd (at this point, I have had to learn each style)

btw - totally off topic - welcome to the dark side I also came from the Vette camp. 1976 Vette...some days I wish I still had her...idle never sounded so sweet. And yes, I can speak to the LSx motors tq...brother has a LS6 motor in his car...f'ing tq for days...

 

i am still trying to figure out why you bought an evo if your not going to launch it.

 

Driving the Evo 9 with the larger housing as a DD and trying to stay out of boost can become embarrassing. Everyday I have old ladies in Camrys and Accords looking like they're hauling a$$ when they accelerate away from an intersection with me alongside them. Oh well, that's what happens with a small displacement motor and a large turbo. I could always boost though.